Milky Way - which lens?
Discussion
I'd love to get some photos of the Milky Way - it would involve a bit of travelling, as I'm just north of Birmingham, but I'm certainly willing to give it a try. I've done a bit of research on some Dark Sky sites, so I know roughly where (and when) to go. I'm expecting to have to go to the Long Mynd at Church Stretton as a minimum and probably North Wales to get properly dark.
However, having read a few blogs, I'm unsure of which lens to use (I'm not going to lash out on a new lens for this, unless I suddenly get hooked)
I have a Nikkor 16-35 f4 and a Nikkor 50mm f1.4.
Clearly, one is wide enough, but a bit slow, and the other is plenty fast enough, but a bit long
Body is a Nikon D810, so decent high ISO performance
Thoughts?
However, having read a few blogs, I'm unsure of which lens to use (I'm not going to lash out on a new lens for this, unless I suddenly get hooked)
I have a Nikkor 16-35 f4 and a Nikkor 50mm f1.4.
Clearly, one is wide enough, but a bit slow, and the other is plenty fast enough, but a bit long
Body is a Nikon D810, so decent high ISO performance
Thoughts?
Ed_P said:
The manual-focus Samyang/Rokinon 14mm F/2.8 gets a lot of good reviews for milky way and night-sky photography.
Sorry - didn't make it clear - I know I need a fast ultra-wide (Nikon 14-24 f2.8 would be my chosen lens). However, I don't want to spend money (yet) so the question is - which of my two existing lenses would be best?One thing to bear in mind is the '500 rule'.
Divide 500 by the focal length (full frame equivalent) of your lens and you'll get a rough shutter speed in seconds where you'll start to see star trails. This will give you the slowest shutter speed you should use for that focal length.
For the 50mm lens this would be 10s and for the 16-35 it would be 31s at 16mm.
This will affect your shutter speed/aperture/ISO workings. Obviously, the longer the focal length, a wider maximum aperture is better.
Divide 500 by the focal length (full frame equivalent) of your lens and you'll get a rough shutter speed in seconds where you'll start to see star trails. This will give you the slowest shutter speed you should use for that focal length.
For the 50mm lens this would be 10s and for the 16-35 it would be 31s at 16mm.
This will affect your shutter speed/aperture/ISO workings. Obviously, the longer the focal length, a wider maximum aperture is better.
peter tdci said:
One thing to bear in mind is the '500 rule'.
Divide 500 by the focal length (full frame equivalent) of your lens and you'll get a rough shutter speed in seconds where you'll start to see star trails. This will give you the slowest shutter speed you should use for that focal length.
For the 50mm lens this would be 10s and for the 16-35 it would be 31s at 16mm.
This will affect your shutter speed/aperture/ISO workings. Obviously, the longer the focal length, a wider maximum aperture is better.
Great advice Divide 500 by the focal length (full frame equivalent) of your lens and you'll get a rough shutter speed in seconds where you'll start to see star trails. This will give you the slowest shutter speed you should use for that focal length.
For the 50mm lens this would be 10s and for the 16-35 it would be 31s at 16mm.
This will affect your shutter speed/aperture/ISO workings. Obviously, the longer the focal length, a wider maximum aperture is better.
Evolved said:
peter tdci said:
One thing to bear in mind is the '500 rule'.
Divide 500 by the focal length (full frame equivalent) of your lens and you'll get a rough shutter speed in seconds where you'll start to see star trails. This will give you the slowest shutter speed you should use for that focal length.
For the 50mm lens this would be 10s and for the 16-35 it would be 31s at 16mm.
This will affect your shutter speed/aperture/ISO workings. Obviously, the longer the focal length, a wider maximum aperture is better.
Great advice Divide 500 by the focal length (full frame equivalent) of your lens and you'll get a rough shutter speed in seconds where you'll start to see star trails. This will give you the slowest shutter speed you should use for that focal length.
For the 50mm lens this would be 10s and for the 16-35 it would be 31s at 16mm.
This will affect your shutter speed/aperture/ISO workings. Obviously, the longer the focal length, a wider maximum aperture is better.
I'm now glad (as a Canon user) that I read on past the part where the OP mentioned choosing between Nikon lenses!
50mm is a great all round lens that would do you fine for astro photography (though a 20 or 24mm wide angle prime would be better if you do it full time).
You also have to remember that leaving the exposure for more than 30 seconds will give you star trails, but you can have some fantastic pictures like that
You also have to remember that leaving the exposure for more than 30 seconds will give you star trails, but you can have some fantastic pictures like that
Kermit power said:
Going in the other direction to the OP, I presume if I actually want to encourage star trails, I'd just go with a narrow aperture, low ISO and a tripod?
For decent star trails, you're probably going to want a minimum of half an hour exposure but maybe up to several hours. It is possible to do that in one shot but there are some big drawbacks. Firstly, the psychological issue that you have to have 100% faith that you have nailed all your focus and exposure settings and that there are going to be no technical hiccups in the few hours that you walk away and leave the camera to it. Digital cameras can also generate a lot of thermal noise during very long exposures.So the generally preferred method is to stack lots (100's) of shorter exposures using stacking software. The idea is that you get all your camera settings nailed. Fire off a couple of test shots and then -using an intervalometer- set the camera shooting away for as long as you like.
Edited by Gad-Westy on Sunday 6th August 16:22
I'd try the 16-35 before you go spending any money. The d810 can take high iso well. Any of the 2.8 lenses are only going to gain you one stop which isn't life changing. You have a decent starting point with the 16-35 already. There are lenses more suited to this I'd get a feel for it all first and get used to the techniques required before worrying too much about the gear.
Edited by Gad-Westy on Sunday 6th August 16:27
The 16-35 should be fine initially. More important will be to locate decent seeing with no light pollution.
If your camera has a cropped sensor bear that in mind when setting exposure length under the rule of 500. Also consider downloading some stacking software, which will allow you to stack multiple images.
A study tripod also useful. And coffee
If your camera has a cropped sensor bear that in mind when setting exposure length under the rule of 500. Also consider downloading some stacking software, which will allow you to stack multiple images.
A study tripod also useful. And coffee
corozin said:
The 16-35 should be fine initially. More important will be to locate decent seeing with no light pollution.
If your camera has a cropped sensor bear that in mind when setting exposure length under the rule of 500. Also consider downloading some stacking software, which will allow you to stack multiple images.
A study tripod also useful. And coffee
Agree with this. I took this with a D610, the 16-35 lens and a £10 tabletop tripod (had to be small to pack in motocycle luggage). It was in the Swiss alps though so light pollution much less of an issueIf your camera has a cropped sensor bear that in mind when setting exposure length under the rule of 500. Also consider downloading some stacking software, which will allow you to stack multiple images.
A study tripod also useful. And coffee
silobass said:
Probably a silly question, but with long exposures you get the star trails, does the Milky Way move too?
Milky way is moving, we are moving with it, the Earth needs a few hundred million years for one revolution. Blink and you will not miss it 
For the OP. Knowing where to point will also help in some area's.
Might help.
http://stellarium.org
Can't remember what arm we are probably seeing as well.
Don't forget that right now you still only have a couple of hours where it's truly dark past dusk and before dawn starts creeping in again. We're around the time for a full moon as well, and the wind isn't helping.
I've been experimenting with the exposure to the right technique on my d7000 with some fun results on a tamron 11-16. Waiting for some crisper winter nights for some star trail fun
I've been experimenting with the exposure to the right technique on my d7000 with some fun results on a tamron 11-16. Waiting for some crisper winter nights for some star trail fun
Gad-Westy said:
Yep. Some good apps out there for determining position of it.
Cheers, I meant more for issues like star trails are an issue, didn't want to get a milky milky way 
I guess from the next post to yours that I get a million or so years before that becomes an issue!There is a new moon due on the 21st, which should hopefully rule out some light. Day or so either side and a dark place should get some results?
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff